In Chapter 2 of the The Republic Glaucon, the brother of Plato, challenged Socrates to provide a reason to act morally even when immorality appeared more profitable. He related the story of the ring of Gyges, a ring which gives the wearer invisibility and hence preserves his (or her) anonymity in committing the most egregious of crimes. Such a person may maintain his reputation for good while stealing, pillaging and seducing at will.
Is such a challenge asking too much? Is the only way to provide a valid reason to act morally an appeal to virtue as its own reward, without any consideration of the external benefits? Is it enough that morality is more profitable than immorality MOST of the time, even if not in the wildly implausible thought experiment of the Ring of Gyges?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThough the story of the Ring of Gyges makes the claim that morality is only more rewarding than immorality MOST of the time, Plato challenges this by arguing that only morality and behaving in a moral manner leads to a life that is the most profitable, happy, and pleasure-filled. Plato's definition of morality is one in which all components of the soul and mind perform their own functions, work in harmony, with reason controlling all. Corresponding, Plato believes that only those of the philosophical type, the only kind of individual who is knowledgable and has experience, intelligence, and appreciates rationality have tastes that are closet to the truth. (330) Therefore, the most enjoyable form of pleasure is that which belongs to the intellectual part of the mind, which thus belongs only to the moral philosopher. Furthermore, Plato goes on to define what true pleasure is, and by doing so, defines happiness and asserts his claim that only morality can lead to a happy, pleasurable existence. Plato distinguishes between two types of pleasures: true, genuine pleasure and false illusory pleasures: "there are objects which never alter...and are never deceptive...; on the other hand, there are objects that are constantly altering anda re perishable" (334). Plato then asks which object has a higher degree of reality, and Glaucon answers the class of objects that never alter. Therefore, objects with a higher degree of reality are able to more fully satisfy and are enabled to more really and truly feel true pleasure, while objects less real would only partially satisfy and thus reveals a less form of pleasure. Thus, since only a philosopher has access to the truth and reality, only a philosopher is able to access the genuine pleasures and live a more rewarding life. However, the man in the story of the Ring of Gyges only gains illusory pleasures, and as a result does not experience true satisfaction. Plato's asserts that only a philosopher, who is behaves morally and complies with his definition of true happiness and pleasure, is able have a more profitable existence. This objects the claim that there are instances where immorality is more rewarding than morality.
ReplyDelete